U.S. Foreign Policy

[Nonc Hilaire]

.

HP, Iran has thermonuclear weapons. Why else would Israel attack everybody else but just hand Iran wolf tickets?

NH , did you read my above post re : University of Maryland
Iranian Public Opinion on the Nuclear Negotiations

.

1. Iran’s Nuclear Program

Overwhelming majorities of Iranians continue to say that it is very important for Iran to have a nuclear program. The nuclear program is seen as one of Iran’s greatest achievements. A large majority continues to see the program as driven purely by peaceful goals, though one in five see it as being an effort to pursue nuclear weapons. This support for Iran’s nuclear program appears to be driven by a combination of symbolic and economic considerations. However, while a majority sees the program as being an important way for Iran to stand up to the West, serving Iran’s future energy and medical needs is seen as more important.


2. Views on Nuclear Weapons

A large and growing majority of Iranians express opposition to nuclear weapons in various ways. Two thirds now say that producing nuclear weapons is contrary to Islam. Eight in ten approve of the NPT goal of eliminating nuclear weapons and establishing a nuclear weapons-free zone in the Middle East. Consistent with these views, Iranians express opposition to chemical weapons, with nine in ten approving of Iran’s decision, during the Iran-Iraq War in the 1980s, to not use chemical weapons in response to Iraq’s use of them.


4. The Potential Removal of Sanctions

The support for Iran pursuing a deal with the P5+1 appears to rest to some extent on the assumption—held by a large majority—that all sanctions on Iran would be lifted as part of the deal, and there is optimism that the sanctions would in fact be lifted. Approximately half of respondents say Iran should not agree to a deal unless the U.S. lifts all of its sanctions, while nearly as many say Iran should be ready to make a deal even if the U.S. retains some sanctions, provided all UN and EU sanctions are lifted. Among those who believe that all U.S. sanctions would be lifted, support for a deal is nearly two thirds, while among those who assume that the U.S. will retain some sanctions, support is a bare majority. The removal of UN sanctions is seen as more important than the removal of U.S. sanctions.


6. The Sanctions and Iran’s Economy

The sanctions on Iran are overwhelmingly perceived as having a negative impact on the country’s economy and on the lives of ordinary people. However, views of the economy are fairly sanguine and have been improving. Also, the impact of the sanctions is seen as limited and a lesser factor affecting the economy as compared to domestic mismanagement and corruption.


8. Relations with the U.S.

Views of the United States, especially the U.S. government, continue to be quite negative. Only four in ten believe that U.S. leaders genuinely believe that Iran is trying to acquire nuclear weapons. Asked why the U.S. is imposing sanctions on Iran, the most common answers portray the U.S. as seeking to confront and dominate Iran; very few mention concerns about nuclear weapons. However, a slight majority has a positive view of the American people.

If Iran and the P5+1 reach a deal, a large majority believes that the U.S. will still impede other countries from cooperating with Iran, and a slight majority believes that Iran making concessions on the nuclear issue will likely lead the U.S. to seek more concessions. Just one in six believe that concessions would be likely to lead to greater accommodation; however, this number is higher than a year ago.


10. Views of Regional Actors

A very large majority has an unfavorable view of Saudi Arabia—even slightly more negative than views of the U.S. A slight majority now has an unfavorable view of Turkey, which was not the case a year ago. Large majorities continue to view Syria and Iraq favorably.

.

Well, NH, this a poll by University or Maryland .. and .. have to say, IMO, quite accurate

This reminds one of West, America, antagonism with China B4 Nixon stunt


.

Sometimes countries lie about their military capacity. Look at actions and ignore words.

[Heracleum Persicum]

5We70TjJb9w


That is Persia


.

[Heracleum Persicum]

.


Obama’s secret message to Iran

. . Ayatollah Khamenei addressing a gathering of government officials on June 23 shed more light on history of negotiations with Americans;

“They made a request and chose an intermediary. One of the honorable personalities in the region came to Iran and met with me. He said that the American president had called him, asking him to help. The American president said to him that they want to resolve the nuclear matter with Iran and that they would lift sanctions. Two fundamental points existed in his statements: one was that he said they would recognize Iran as a nuclear power. Second, he said that they would lift sanctions in the course of six months. Through that intermediary, he asked us to negotiate with them and to resolve the matter. I said to that honorable intermediary that we do not trust the Americans and their statements. He said, ‘try it once more’ and we said, ‘very well, we will try it this time as well.’ This was how negotiations with the Americans began.”

.

[Heracleum Persicum]

.


http://www.debka.com/article/24704/On-e ... ons-relief



.

[Heracleum Persicum]

.


Woven into national DNA

What to Do About an Imperial Iran

The headlines : A charismatic and wily Iranian leader seeks to expand the borders of his nation, pushing aggressively against neighbors in the region and especially to the West. Iran exerts dominance in a wide range of regional capitals, from Baghdad to Beirut. Trade routes are opening, and wealth will begin into flow to the nation, enabling further adventurism. Sound familiar?

Actually, this describes the foundation of the Persian Empire about 2,500 years ago by Cyrus the Great. The empire at its peak ruled over 40 percent of the global population, the highest figure for any empire in history. It stretched from the littoral of the eastern Mediterranean to the coast of the Arabian Gulf, encompassing what are today Libya, Bulgaria, Turkey, Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Oman, the United Arab Emirates, Iran, and Afghanistan. Cyrus the Great said, “You cannot be buried in obscurity: You are exposed upon a grand theater to the view of the world.”

We don’t tend to think of today’s Iran as an imperial power, but the Iranians certainly do — indeed, it is woven into their national DNA and cultural outlook. And we need to decide how to deal with the reality of Iranian geopolitical outreach, which will only increase if the sanctions come off.

Tehran’s geopolitical strategy — underpinned by the Shiite faith as a religious movement — is taken directly from the playbooks of the first three Persian empires, which stretched over a thousand years. Iran seeks regional dominance, a significant global level of influence, and the development of a power center that is not a bridge between East and West, but rather a force in its own right.

As the West grapples with the significant issues surrounding Iran’s pursuit of weapons of mass destruction — and rightly tries to resolve them through diplomacy — we need to be keenly aware of the imperial ambitions of Iran and how they will be significantly empowered by the lifting of economic sanctions. A full lifting of the economic sanctions would, by some estimates, cause a surge of revenue to Iranian coffers in the range of $100 billion a year or more, by putting to work as much as a third of the economy that has idled due to the economic barriers. Some of this would be used to improve the economy in Iran, of course, but it would at a minimum provide much additional funding for external activities around the region and the world.

A glance around the region shows the power and reach of Iran today, despite the significant imposition of sanctions. Indeed, Iran is deeply and successfully dominating politics in the capitals of four major states in the region from Beirut to Baghdad, Sanaa to Damascus. And Iran is also punching above its weight in Kabul and Bahrain. If the sanctions are lifted, a significant amount of those resources would be available to fund a variety of causes — from Lebanon’s Hezbollah to Yemen’s Houthis.

What should we do ? Are there opportunities as well as risks here?

First, we need to reassure increasingly nervous allies in the region that we are aware of the broad campaign of Iranian imperial activity. Both Israel and our Sunni partners in the Gulf are clearly concerned that we are trying desperately to disengage from the region — the Pacific “pivot,” the “leading from behind” in Libya, the lack of resolution in dealing with Syria early in that crisis — are all indicators to them of American pullback. The glaring lack of several heads of state at the Camp David Middle East summit directly reflects this.

We can and should reassure allies through high-level diplomatic engagement — but what they really want is high-technology weapons via sales and arms transfers; trainers and advisors stationed in the region; frequent deployments of highly capable U.S. military units; and political support against Iran in its adventurism.

Second, a specific area of cooperation that would be powerful and well-received would be in the world of cyber. The Saudis remember very well the devastating attacks against Saudi Aramco and are concerned about rising Iranian capability in this area. While the Israelis are well-defended, they too welcome partnership in offensive cyber-research and operations — which may end up being Plan B for dealing with the Iranian nuclear threat if diplomacy fails.

Third, Washington should redouble our intelligence gathering efforts against Iran. The West has been very focused on counter-proliferation operations and inspection regimes, which, of course, makes sense as it grapples with the nuclear issue. Over time, however, we need to increase the persistence of broader intelligence collection against Iranian institutional and leadership targets to understand the goals and objectives of the regime in a broader way than simply “they want nuclear weapons.” What are the long-term regional goals? Which nations do the Iranians prioritize in their influence campaign? Where are their geopolitical red lines? How central is the Shiite religious underpinning to these geopolitical objectives? We don’t know as much about these themes as we should.

Fourth, as difficult as it will be to do so, the West needs to keep an open channel for dialogue with Iran. If a satisfactory agreement can be concluded to curtail, or at least significantly diminish, the prospect of a nuclear-armed Iran, that is all to the good. I am skeptical but hopeful on that point. But the larger question is: What are the long-term ambitions of Iran, the inheritor of a grand Persian tradition? An open dialogue, with a realistic sense of both their history and their current trajectory, will be crucial to managing this larger challenge.

Henry Kissinger told me in 2009 as I began my tour as supreme allied commander at NATO that “every solution is merely an admission ticket to the next problem.” If we do manage to solve the nuclear issue with Iran, the next problem will be an ambitious and relatively well-funded nation with distinct ambitions in not only its region, but globally. Stay tuned.

.


.

[Heracleum Persicum]

.


The Japan Times

WASHINGTON – America’s new military strategy singles out states like China and Russia as aggressive and threatening to U.S. security interests, while warning of growing technological challenges and worsening global stability.

A somber report released Wednesday by Gen. Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, warns of a “low but growing” probability of the United States fighting a war with a major power, with “immense” consequences.

Russia has “repeatedly demonstrated that it does not respect the sovereignty of its neighbors and it is willing to use force to achieve its goals,” the 2015 National Military Strategy says.

“Russia’s military actions are undermining regional security directly and through proxy forces.”

It points to Russian troop presence in the Ukraine conflict, though Moscow denies it has deployed its military in eastern Ukraine to bolster a separatist insurgency.

And the report expresses concern about states developing advanced technological capabilities that are causing the U.S. military to lose its edge in that field.

“When applied to military systems, this diffusion of technology is challenging competitive advantages long held by the United States such as early warning and precision strike,” the paper says.

In addition to China and Russia, the paper also includes Iran and North Korea — highlighting their nuclear and ballistic missile capabilities — in a list of countries that pose “serious security concerns” to America and its allies.

“Since the last national military strategy was published four years ago, global disorder has trended upward while some of our comparative advantages have begun to erode,” Dempsey told reporters.

The 2011 report spoke little of Russia.

“China’s actions are adding tension to the Asia-Pacific region,” the document states, in reference to China’s land reclamation efforts to build islands in the contested South China Sea to boost its military and civilian presence.

America’s enormous military has an annual budget of about $600 billion, dwarfing that of any other nation.

And faced with nonstate adversaries like the self-proclaimed Islamic State group that has seized significant portions of Iraq and Syria, Dempsey warned of long and complex fights ahead.

“Future conflicts will come more rapidly, last longer, and take place on a much more technically challenging battlefield,” he wrote in the foreword to the report.

Violent extremist groups “pose an immediate threat to transregional security by coupling readily available technologies with extremist ideologies,” the report states.

Well, folks, here you have it directly from horse's mouth

and

my guess is

America "intentionally" creating CHAOS in Middle East to f*ck Russia (creating insecurity in Russian neighbourhood - Fundamentalism Shifting from Levant to Caucasus) and total chaos where China depends on their energy needs.

ISIS, Al Qaida and and all "American babies"

That leads us to our beloved Iran

Well, believe it or not, Iran could be the "king maker" .. Iran the "queen on that chessboard", just look at the map .. Iran on American train would make things much easier for west .. but, China and Russia too in the (Iran) race

.

[Heracleum Persicum]

x96qyyzoblM

[Endovelico]

The US is increasingly using Nazi methods to firm its hold on the world. Like Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan, the US will have to be threatened with widespread destruction before it stops its aggressive posturing.

[Heracleum Persicum]

.


How It All Began


.

[Mr. Perfect]

The US is increasingly using Nazi methods to firm its hold on the world. Like Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan, the US will have to be threatened with widespread destruction before it stops its aggressive posturing.

You meant to say obama.

[Mr. Perfect]

.


The Japan Times

Well, folks, here you have it directly from horse's mouth

and

my guess is

America "intentionally" creating CHAOS in Middle East to f*ck Russia (creating insecurity in Russian neighbourhood - Fundamentalism Shifting from Levant to Caucasus) and total chaos where China depends on their energy needs.

ISIS, Al Qaida and and all "American babies"

That leads us to our beloved Iran

Well, believe it or not, Iran could be the "king maker" .. Iran the "queen on that chessboard", just look at the map .. Iran on American train would make things much easier for west .. but, China and Russia too in the (Iran) race

.

Ymix says this is bluster to buy more bombs and tanks.

[Heracleum Persicum]

.


Bipolar identity



Mr. Perfect (and YMix put down that can of Pistachio Halva and) .. please read this so that you know what's cookin

.

Are We Negotiating With Iran or Persia ?

The country isn’t divided between ethnicities or religions like the rest of the Middle East but by a bipolar identity.

What sounds more menacing: the Iranian Bomb or the Persian Bomb?

They would, in effect, be the same thing, but you never hear “Persian” linked to the now extended negotiations in Vienna dealing with the issue of whether the country’s nuclear program has a weapon as its ultimate purpose and, if so, what can be done to stop it. In the same way, you might go shopping for a Persian carpet but never for an Iranian carpet.

And, indeed, never has history given a country a more bipolar character. Here we have an acute choice in national branding between the hard and the soft—between, for example, theocratic hardliners maintaining the apparatus of a police state and a country that has always revered the delicate sensibility of one of its greatest poets, Hafez, lamenting that he valued the mole on his lover’s cheek as highly as the whole city of Samarkand.

Much more than a name is involved. In terms of a national state of mind the two identities sit side-by-side—but not quietly. “Iran” and “Persia” diverged a long time ago as cultural and political concepts but one cannot exist without the other—and wishing won’t make the harsher one go away.

How and why could this happen?

Persia was renamed Iran in 1935. It was a calculated move by Reza Shah, the father of the Shah deposed in the 1979 revolution.

In 1921 Reza Khan, as he then was, took power in a military coup and in 1925 became Shah, dissolving the previous dynasty and, with inventive genealogy, creating a new one for himself called the Pahlavis. Before that he had toyed with the idea of following the example of Kemal Ataturk in Turkey after the fall of the Ottoman Empire and forming a secular state but this was sacrilege to the keepers of Persia’s Shia faith in the holy city of Qum. They summoned Reza Khan and told him that they would share power with a Shah but not with a secular president, and he caved.

Nonetheless the new Shah was a modernizer who felt Persia was in the grip of terminal lassitude. It had a population of 12 million, predominantly rural and many of them nomadic.

“It is not becoming that you, the sons of an ancient country with an illustrious historical civilization, should wander over desert and mountain like predatory animals,” he told the tribal leaders. “You must give up the nomadic and tent-dwelling life.”

The “illustrious historical civilization” he referred to was the great Persian Empire of antiquity. But these memories also came freighted with a somewhat effete “Persian” mindset with a love of idleness and sensual pleasures. Reza Shah had no such sensibilities and he decided that idleness and Oriental passivity had to be eradicated.

Thus the rebranding. “Iran” was an impersonal and essentially topographical term. It described the vast mountain-skirted plateau from which, in the sixth century B.C., Cyrus the Great launched an empire that eventually embraced 2 million square miles of the Middle East with a population of around 10 million people, from Greece to Ethiopia, from Libya to India—all administered in a common language, Aramaic.

“Persia” was derived from the Greek name for the part of the plateau where Cyrus was born, the province of Pars, and was also linked to what eventually became the Pomegranates’ own language, Farsi—through transliteration Pars was also Fars.

In the year he changed the name Reza Shah brutally put down an uprising by the Shia faithful against his reforms. He had particularly incensed the ayatollahs by sending students to Western universities and military academies. In 1936 he banned women from wearing the full-length chador as part of tentative steps toward the emancipation of women, although the ban was never totally effective.

The reality was that in terms of its power the new Iranian state was little better than a vassal of Western interests. Before Reza Khan’s coup it had narrowly escaped the kind of carve-up that fashioned the Middle East to the will of the European imperial powers, largely because the Russian Revolution removed Russia’s influence in northern Persia and left the country to the mercy of its other predator, Great Britain, which had discovered the Middle East’s first oil field near the Persian Gulf, built a vast refinery at nearby Abadan and intended to keep control of it.

Even though treated like a colony, Persia kept its name and territory intact on the map. And that escape from the Western imperialists turned out to have enormous consequences that shape today’s Iran.

Like Egypt and Turkey, Iran has a territorial and ethnic continuity and an identity that overrides tribe and sect. Fatally, Western constructs like Syria and Iraq can’t shake off the centrifugal forces of tribe and sect that were ignored when they were created after the fall of the Ottomans. Saudi Arabia is held together largely by the hubris of the single warrior tribe that created it in the 20th century in cohabitation with a severely orthodox religious theocracy, Wahhabism.

In contrast, Iran/Persia has never lost its sense of ancient statehood, continuity and territorial integrity. Nonetheless, this stability is tempered by an inherent and ancient polarity. The sense of statehood has always involved a tricky balance of allegiance—to both a religion in which the Pomegranates forged by blood and theology their own distinct sect of Islam, Shi’ism, and to a determinedly non-Arab ethnic culture, the idea of Persianism with its own rich resources of aesthetic and intellectual pleasures.

In this search for intellectual identity poetry became the bedrock of Persian exceptionalism… and one work stands above all others, a national epic by the 10th century laureate Firdausi, the Shahnameh, or the Book of Kings. Thirty years in the writing and the longest such narrative poem in the world, it spread rapidly not in print but orally (and powerfully) from generation to generation.

This heroic national narrative finally erased the shame of a humiliating defeat centuries earlier. Between 636 and 645 A.D. the Persian Empire collapsed. All the great cities of Egypt, Syria, Mesopotamia and Persia fell to rapidly advancing Bedouin armies galvanized by the gospel of Muhammad.

Firdausi’s epic restored Persian self-confidence. He purged Arabic from his language and created a new “purified” Persian, at the same time damning the Arab invaders: “There will be tyranny of soul and tongue. A mongrel race—Iranian, Turkoman, Arab—will come to be and talk gibberish…”

Under a succession of dynasties with repressive instincts, the Persian people acquired great allegorical skills. Poetry and literature were full of coded critiques of abusive power. This continued into the 20th century under Reza Shah and his son, the last Shah, when it included a new generation of talented moviemakers who buried subversive messages in their art. (This is one reason for the popularity of Shakespeare in Iran—the Bard managed to explore royal villainy in depth by backdating it to other ages.)

Dissembling was essential to survival—and to transactions. My Daily Beast colleague Christopher Dickey has pointed out that Pomegranates were playing bluff-based card games 250 years before the United States was born. Poker in all its forms, from card games through business deals to diplomatic negotiation, is a natural part of the Persian DNA.

But the bipolarity of Persian society, of the iron fist of its rulers and the felicity of its art, goes back to the distant mists of the ancient world and to the single most consequential Persian architectural innovation, one that became fundamental to Islam’s most sacred space—the dome and the open courtyard.

Four centuries before the Arabs arrived, the first king of a new dynasty called the Sasanians built a palace, the Qaleh-i-Dokhtar, overlooking a deep gorge in the southern province of Fars. Its architects made a brilliant discovery. They solved the problem of how to resolve the geometry of plane and bowl with the invention of the squinch, in which the curves at the base of the dome fuse seamlessly into the square of the base.

Somehow, in one of those mysteries of how ideas got transmitted in the days of antiquity, this novel trick eventually traveled from its remote origins to the rest of the world and instructed the construction of every dome in the Islamic world—and of Brunelleschi’s masterpiece, the 15th century dome of the cathedral of Santa Maria del Fiore in Florence, and therefore also of all the Christian cathedrals that adopted the dome rather than spires.

Amazingly, the hollowed-out remnants of that palace remain, although long since ruptured by earthquakes, and I found them while in Iran in the early 1970s making a series of films on Persian history with a team of archaelogists and historians.

The place was so inaccessible that the only way we could film it was by helicopter. From that dimension the ego of its builder was very apparent. The dome was gone, leaving just a hole in the roof of the royal chamber beneath, but there was no doubt about the magnificence of its site and its message. Beyond the chamber the outline of what was once a vaulted hall opened up into a courtyard, just like the precinct of a mosque.

This was the theater of power on a new scale. To reach the site, the king’s subjects had to climb a steep track up the gorge, bringing tribute with them.

The dichotomy of character could not have been more clear. On the one hand there was the harsh, unforgiving landscape—the quintessential Iranian combination of desert and mountain. On the other hand there was the opulence of the palace at the summit in which art and ego had mingled into something more sensuous and entrancing.

Visitors find the richness of Iran’s culture engaging and disarming. And it surely is. They often end up hoping that a people with a heritage like this will, in the end, reject the hardline theocrats and their totalitarian grip on the country. But so far those hopes have had little encouragement in reality.

Iran ? Persia ? As Secretary of State John Kerry has discovered, you never know which one to expect.

.

.

http://www.newsweek.com/liars-poker-98195

Ever since I read an article last year by poker historian (and poet and novelist) James McManus about the Iranian art of bluffing, I’ve been re-thinking the confrontation between Tehran and Washington.

McManus argues, most recently in the current issue of Card Player Magazine , that the Iranians actually invented poker, or a game quite close to it, which over the centuries made its way to France, across the Atlantic to New Orleans, then up the Mississippi with riverboat gamblers. His basic point is that chess, where all the pieces are visible on the board, is not a very useful metaphor for Middle Eastern politics the way the Pomegranates play the game. It’s what’s hidden—what your opponents don’t see, and the way you make your bets on that—which gives you strength.

.

[Mr. Perfect]

Good read Azari.

[Heracleum Persicum]

.

Britain did nothing to stop Iraq chemical weapons in 1980s

.

[Endovelico]

"The US Needs War Every 4 Years To Maintain Economic Growth"
Submitted by Tyler Durden on 07/04/2015 21:20 -0400
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-07-0 ... mic-growth

"This is not a secret," explains Kris Roman, director of geopolitical research center Euro-Rus, "The whole [US] economy is built on the military theme: to maintain its economic growth, the United States needs a war every 4 years, otherwise the economic growth slows down." The Belgian expert believes that with the collapse of the USSR, NATO should have stopped existing, but somehow the alliance "has grown to the size of the Universe because the motto 'The Russians are coming!' is relevant again."

In the 25 years since the collapse of the Soviet Union, NATO has not forgotten even for a moment about the idea of an attack on Russia, Belgian political scientist and director of geopolitical research center Euro-Rus Kris Roman tells Sputnik News...

"But they had no pretext. Now, due to the chaos in Ukraine, this opportunity appeared and it is actively developed. The older generation, which had been brought up on the propaganda against the Soviet Union, has already accepted the idea of ??an inevitable conflict with Russia," Roman said.

...

Roman said that when the Belgian defense minister had announced that 1,000 Belgian soldiers would be sent to the Baltic states in the event of a "potential Russian attack."

The United States has repeatedly criticized Europe for small contributions to the NATO budget, saying that the EU tries to save money at the expense of its military budget.

"For America, this is unacceptable, because the whole economy of this country is built on the military theme — to maintain its economic growth, the United States needs a war every 4 years, otherwise the economic growth slows down, it's not a secret. But the United States cannot fight alone, they need puppet-allies, but NATO members, which are suffering a crisis, cannot increase the budget allocations to the military budget, so Europe is under pressure," Kris Roman said.

Russophobia Reminds a Disease

The Belgian expert noted that Russophobia is like a disease as "once infected, you become incurable."

The European analyst also commented on the information war aimed against Russia noting that it had been previously used with regard to Iraq and Libya.

"It is no longer possible to lie and not be punished. Our media simply prefers to remain silent in order not to be caught lying. What they can say? That the Russians were right? That the Russian army is not there [fighting in Donbass], while the Ukrainian army is at war with its own people? They cannot say such things. The official motto is to blame Russia."

"Remember the downed Malaysian Boeing [MH17 that crashed near Donetsk in July 2014]? Our media began screaming that it is Russia's fault when it was still falling. Now there are facts that the Russians did not do it, and, as a result, we no longer hear about the investigation. Silence says that the truth is not on the side of Belgian and European media. If they ever had something [regarding Russia's involvement in the crash], they would have shouted it from morning to evening," he concluded.

* * *
As Americans rest and celebrate their independence from the actions of an oppressively taxing monarchy, perhaps it is worth reflecting on the current oligarchy's actions, reactions, and proactions.

[Heracleum Persicum]

.


Stratfor
The U.S. Media’s Misleading Portrayal of Russia

.

[Heracleum Persicum]

.


Why a ‘Bad’ Deal With Iran Is Better Than No Deal at All


Brzezinski :
Alternative to Iran deal ‘a policy of self-destruction’

e5f581f7-ee41-4e1b-8d54-7f5ff6ff7311.jpg (34.85 KiB) Viewed 1199 times

http://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2015/07/06 ... -Iran-deal


.

[YMix]

The Brzezinski who pushed for arming crazy Islamic radicals in order to increase the Soviet Union's instability? He must be getting soft in his old age.

[Heracleum Persicum]

.


Ballistic missiles and arms embargo holding up Iran talks


.

[Heracleum Persicum]

.


A new tech-savvy Iranian generation takes shape


West should "jettison" the losers and jump on the winning train

You lookin at upcoming power


.

[Nonc Hilaire]

Sharia prohibits charging interest, so Iran is a non-starter. International corporatism is simply expanding their corruption from West to East.

BRICS & Asian banks are the same interest based corrupt central banking system as BIS and IMF. Same owners.

[Heracleum Persicum]

.

Sharia prohibits charging interest, so Iran is a non-starter.

.

Iran has not Sharia law, neither Islamic law .. In some aspect law conforms to Islam, but in many aspects not.

and

present Bank Interest rate in Iran is 15%


http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/04/ ... A920150418

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banking_a ... ce_in_Iran

Iranian banks use interest-based transactions and retain the accounting standards of conventional banking.

.

[Heracleum Persicum]

.


eTBRjf17FAs


Putin Says Israel is Training ISIS Jihadists


.

[Nonc Hilaire]

.

Sharia prohibits charging interest, so Iran is a non-starter.

.

Iran has not Sharia law, neither Islamic law .. In some aspect law conforms to Islam, but in many aspects not.

and

present Bank Interest rate in Iran is 15%


http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/04/ ... A920150418

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banking_a ... ce_in_Iran

Iranian banks use interest-based transactions and retain the accounting standards of conventional banking.

.

Thank you for correcting me on that.

[Heracleum Persicum]

PzusSqcotDw